Altruism
1. Are we, as some might say, motivated by a desire to save our off-spring?
2. Must there always be some sort of intrinsic reward for doing good?
3. Mr. Otis once said, "That having integrity is doing the right thing when no one is watching." If this is so, and no one knows when we have done good, would you still do good?
4. "Delayed reciprocal altruism", seems like a gamble - back to game theory, any way. Does this seem to make sense to you. That is that we act out of a desire to have what we have done being done to us?
5. Are we ever being truly "selfless" when committing an act of altruism?
1. We are indeed motivated by a desire to save our off-spring when they are in trouble because they want to reproduce and grow, and that also applies to their off-spring as well, who they are helping to grow and get their own off-spring.
Most people will do something good when there is a reward that comes with the good deed because everyone likes a good reward after doing a deed. Even if we don’t get something physical, we have a psychological feeling of satisfaction or pride that we did something good as an aftereffect, so that feels good too.
2. Truthfully, I wouldn’t because there’s no motivation or drive for me to actually do good while no one’s watching because how it would actually help me at all would be the main question that would pop out in my head. Most of the time, the answer to that question would be nothing, so I just wouldn’t do it. Of course, this doesn’t apply to the everyday stuff for me, like throwing trash in the bin and other simple things.
This could apply to a lot of times when you do such “selfless” acts, like when you give a birthday present to a friend at a party, most people would usually expect the person that received the present to give them something in return on their birthday. When it comes to charity and such, it doesn’t really apply because you know that these homeless people won’t exactly be giving you something back any time soon, but you still do it anyway. So delayed reciprocal altruism doesn’t always work out all the time.
3. If anyone said that they are doing something completely selflessly, they are liars. No one is really ever 100% selfless when they do good, because for them to want to do it, there usually has to be something good for them that has to come with it. So really, completely selfless altruism is next to impossible.
4. This could apply to a lot of times when you do such “selfless” acts, like when you give a birthday present to a friend at a party, most people would usually expect the person that received the present to give them something in return on their birthday. When it comes to charity and such, it doesn’t really apply because you know that these homeless people won’t exactly be giving you something back any time soon, but you still do it anyway. So delayed reciprocal altruism doesn’t always work out all the time.
5. If anyone said that they are doing something completely selflessly, they are liars. No one is really ever 100% selfless when they do good, because for them to want to do it, there usually has to be something good for them that has to come with it. So really, completely selfless altruism is next to impossible.
What seems to be the major motivating factor for people that are affected by an eating disorder?
The biggest motivating factor for people affected by such horrible eating disorders is the media of today. If you turn on the TV, you’ll always see those commercials with those super hot models that are incredibly skinny and stuff, it’s really scary. Many people watch those kind of commercials, mostly girls, start to become a bit self conscious of how they look like, and start to think that they must become like those models too, which is where the entire eating problem starts. They start thinking that if they stop eating food, they’ll become skinny and pretty like those models as well, but no, that’s a huge mistake on their part. The internet doesn’t help either, with those pro-anorexic sites all over the place, promoting and encouraging anorexic behavior. With all those people on the website telling you how “good” it is, of course they’d want to do it, since they want to become “beautiful”. It’s a cruel cruel world.
What might be the social/political implication for there being a gay gene?
The possible existence of a gay gene will possibly completely alter the way everyone thinks about homosexuals socially and politically. If being a homo is really something that comes from a gene, like having different color skin and such, there would be the demand of having those rights of protection by law, like racial issues and stuff. Socially, if perhaps, the gay gene existed, the public would go wild about finding a “cure” for this gay gene. It’s kind of like the movie X-Men 3, where they use the genes of a mutant to make a “cure” for other mutants, whose powers come from their mutated genes. So in other words, homosexuality would be seen as nothing more than a “disease”. So many people would be less tolerant of homosexuals because they would think that homosexuals have a disease.]
Hierarchy of Needs
Altruism
1. Are we, as some might say, motivated by a desire to save our off-spring?
2. Must there always be some sort of intrinsic reward for doing good?
3. Mr. Otis once said, "That having integrity is doing the right thing when no one is watching." If this is so, and no one knows when we have done good, would you still do good?
4. "Delayed reciprocal altruism", seems like a gamble - back to game theory, any way. Does this seem to make sense to you. That is that we act out of a desire to have what we have done being done to us?
5. Are we ever being truly "selfless" when committing an act of altruism?
1. We are indeed motivated by a desire to save our off-spring when they are in trouble because they want to reproduce and grow, and that also applies to their off-spring as well, who they are helping to grow and get their own off-spring.
Most people will do something good when there is a reward that comes with the good deed because everyone likes a good reward after doing a deed. Even if we don’t get something physical, we have a psychological feeling of satisfaction or pride that we did something good as an aftereffect, so that feels good too.
2. Truthfully, I wouldn’t because there’s no motivation or drive for me to actually do good while no one’s watching because how it would actually help me at all would be the main question that would pop out in my head. Most of the time, the answer to that question would be nothing, so I just wouldn’t do it. Of course, this doesn’t apply to the everyday stuff for me, like throwing trash in the bin and other simple things.
This could apply to a lot of times when you do such “selfless” acts, like when you give a birthday present to a friend at a party, most people would usually expect the person that received the present to give them something in return on their birthday. When it comes to charity and such, it doesn’t really apply because you know that these homeless people won’t exactly be giving you something back any time soon, but you still do it anyway. So delayed reciprocal altruism doesn’t always work out all the time.
3. If anyone said that they are doing something completely selflessly, they are liars. No one is really ever 100% selfless when they do good, because for them to want to do it, there usually has to be something good for them that has to come with it. So really, completely selfless altruism is next to impossible.
4. This could apply to a lot of times when you do such “selfless” acts, like when you give a birthday present to a friend at a party, most people would usually expect the person that received the present to give them something in return on their birthday. When it comes to charity and such, it doesn’t really apply because you know that these homeless people won’t exactly be giving you something back any time soon, but you still do it anyway. So delayed reciprocal altruism doesn’t always work out all the time.
5. If anyone said that they are doing something completely selflessly, they are liars. No one is really ever 100% selfless when they do good, because for them to want to do it, there usually has to be something good for them that has to come with it. So really, completely selfless altruism is next to impossible.
What seems to be the major motivating factor for people that are affected by an eating disorder?
The biggest motivating factor for people affected by such horrible eating disorders is the media of today. If you turn on the TV, you’ll always see those commercials with those super hot models that are incredibly skinny and stuff, it’s really scary. Many people watch those kind of commercials, mostly girls, start to become a bit self conscious of how they look like, and start to think that they must become like those models too, which is where the entire eating problem starts. They start thinking that if they stop eating food, they’ll become skinny and pretty like those models as well, but no, that’s a huge mistake on their part. The internet doesn’t help either, with those pro-anorexic sites all over the place, promoting and encouraging anorexic behavior. With all those people on the website telling you how “good” it is, of course they’d want to do it, since they want to become “beautiful”. It’s a cruel cruel world.
What might be the social/political implication for there being a gay gene?
The possible existence of a gay gene will possibly completely alter the way everyone thinks about homosexuals socially and politically. If being a homo is really something that comes from a gene, like having different color skin and such, there would be the demand of having those rights of protection by law, like racial issues and stuff. Socially, if perhaps, the gay gene existed, the public would go wild about finding a “cure” for this gay gene. It’s kind of like the movie X-Men 3, where they use the genes of a mutant to make a “cure” for other mutants, whose powers come from their mutated genes. So in other words, homosexuality would be seen as nothing more than a “disease”. So many people would be less tolerant of homosexuals because they would think that homosexuals have a disease.]